The Third Division consisted of the regular members and in addition Referee Edwin H. Berm when award was rendered.

"Claim on behalf of the General Committee of the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen on the Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Rail Corp.:

Claim on behalf of D. D. Roberts, for 24 hours pay at the overtime rate, account Carrier violated the current Signalmen's Agreement, particularly Rule 15, 26, and Side Letter 10 (dated May 16, 1999), when it used a junior employee instead of the Claimant for overtime service on January 19 and 26, 2008, and denied the Claimant the opportunity to perform this work. Carrier's File No. 11-21-666. General Chairman's File No. 114-RI-08. BRS File Case No. 14253-NIRC."

The Third Division of the Adjustment Board, upon the whole record and all the evidence, finds that:

The carrier or carriers and the employee or employees involved in this dispute are respectively carrier and employee within the meaning of the Railway Labor Act, as approved June 21,1934.

This Division of the Adjustment Board has jurisdiction over the dispute involved herein.

Parties to said dispute were given due notice of hearing thereon.

At the time this dispute arose, the Claimant was a Signal Testman headquartered at Blue Island with an assigned territory of the Rock Island and

Page 2 Docket No. SG-41014

Southwest Service Districts. The Claimant worked a Monday through Friday schedule. The Claimant also held prior rights on the Rock Island District.

On Saturday, January 19 and Saturday, January 26, 2008, the Carrier assigned a Signal Testman who was junior to the Claimant to work overtime at the Gresham Interlocking on the Rock Island District. According to the Carrier, the overtime flowed from the positions of the group of employees who performed the work as a group of Testmen assigned to perform scheduled bi-annual FRA testing at Gresham the week prior to the claimed dates.

As in Third Division Award 41188, Side Letter No. 10 dated May 16, 1999 ("Prior rights, and the seniority that goes with it, shall be applied as being superior to an individual's relative position on the system seniority roster when an employee is stationed on their prior rights district . . . [and prior rights takes priority in the exercise of seniority, overtime allocation, and preference for receiving vacation or other paid for time not worked") and Public Law Board No. 5565, Award 34 govern this dispute and require a sustaining award.

In terms of a remedy, the Claimant shall be made whole for any lost overtime opportunities on the dates set forth in the claim. However, if the Claimant earned overtime on any of the dates set forth in the claim, those amounts shall be offset against the Carrier's liability.

AWARD